Case: Meet in the Middle
Examples
Case 1
| 2 | 3 | ||||
The clues add up to , which is above (since this a 4x4 puzzle), so the case applies.
| 2 | 4 | 3 | |||
Case 2
| 2 | 3 | 3 | |||||
| 5 | 4 | 3 |
This is a 6x6 puzzle, so we require a sum of .
and , so we can pinpoint the lane peaks in those lanes.
| 2 | 3 | 3 | |||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 5 | 4 | 3 |
We can’t apply the case to the remaining lane, but we can actually still pinpoint the ! Together, the -clues constrict it to these two cells:
| 2 | 3 | 3 | |||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 5 | 4 | 3 |
But of course, in the upper cell’s row the has already been taken, so we’re left with just the lower cell.
| 2 | 3 | 3 | |||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 6 | |||||||
| 5 | 4 | 3 |
Explanation
Take a look at the constraints on where the can go produced by the and clues:
| 3 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | |||
| 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 |
There’s only 1 spot for the !
This happens whenever the 2 clues add up to , which is in fact the highest any 2 opposite clues can ever add up to. If they added up to more, the lane would be unsolvable!
| 4 | 6 | 6 | 6 | ||||
| 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 |
Nowhere for to go!
This deduction is a small reason why closed Skyscrapers are easier than open ones – since every clue has an opposite clue, it’s far more likely you’ll be able to use this deduction to pinpoint a lane peak!